Skip to main content
10:00 am
landscape. in this hour of "state of the union," howard kurtz, as always, breaks it down with his "reliable sources." the hottest author of 2009 has hopscotched from oprah to barbara to rush to hannity to o'reilly this week slamming the media, ripping her former campaign colleagues and kicking up the kind of fuss that sells truckloads of books and every news show that sarah palin didn't go on there's talk about her anyway. she's put herself at the center of a raging media debate of media, ideology, motherhood and fairness and a polarizing figure. all of that came into play as palin sat down with a carefully-selected name of big-name personalities and sympathetics and she's even been approached about reality shows. >> you say no to that? >> absolutely not. i would never. no, i would not ever want to put my kids through such a thing. our life has become kind of a reality show.
10:01 am
>> i follow this president every day. i think he's a socialist. do you think he's a socialist? is the president then more radical than he let on? do you think the president's radical? >> i will not hesitate to say that his associates have been extremely radical. >> so how did the journalists and commentators fare at ping down palin and one losing candidate's book? joining us here in washington matthew of the "weekly standard" author of the new book "the persecution of sarah palin" how the elite media tried to bring down a rising star. julia mason, washington correspondent for "the washington anymorer in" and joe walsh, editor in chief of >> sarah palin keeps sniping at the media as she uses the media to promote her book. >> it's a great strategy. it's us versus them. we were so sick of the health care debate and here comes sarah palin with this book and controversy and the outrageous statements. i think the most interesting
10:02 am
thing about this is the fact checking that's been going on about her book. the point and counterpoint has been interesting to watch and watching her and trying to figure out what her endgame here. maybe matt knows. >> after those two interviews with oprah and barbara walters, sarah palin was interviewed by you, national review, hannity, rush limbaugh and christian broadcasting network. it sounds like she's preaching to the choir, by and large. >> right now she's trying to reach her base of support and the way to do that is to speak to conservative audiences through conservative media. >> other people buy books. >> and they're buying her books, too. you're right about this, howie, if she wants to broaden her appeal and it's crucial and if she'll want to run for elected office i think she'll have to sit down with katie couric among others in the future. >> that will do a number, joe walsh. do you think sarah palin's finger in the eye criticism in the media is playback and she's playing to the base. >> i think she also feels like
10:03 am
she has a griefance. i'm very hard on her in policy ways, but i think she feels she's been held to a different standard. i'm excited to be here with matt today because he wrote a column about how she can redeem herself and possibly run for office last week, i think it was in "the wall street journal" and it read like science fiction or satire in the sense that matt had high hopes that she could do that, and she didn't take any of his advice this week. you know, she really is poking her finger in the eye of the media, really ignoring independents. matt called her more popular than john edwards or less unpopular than john edwards and that's a really low bar. >> let me get matt to comment. >> well, i'm glasse glad you're closely reading my work, but the fact is public perceptions of political figures change over time and look at hillary clinton who has gone from one of the most polarizing figures in american politics to one of the
10:04 am
more popular members of the obama cabinet. look at bill clinton whose career was declared dead over and over again and ronald reagan, same thing, ran for the republican nomination in '76, lost it and people declared him as an out of work-actor. >> i'll come back to you in a second, julie. >> in your book you lump together it seems to me with the news organization with the national enquirer, all as part of the media that are beating up on sarah palin, but shouldn't we make distinctions here between left-wing websites and "the new york times." yeah. absolutely. i think i make those distinctions in the book, but what's interesting with the perception of sarah palin is things that originated in left wing websites ended up being parodied on places like "the new york times" or highly trafficked blogs. sometimes the line between the far left websites and the mainstream media for lack of a better word is very thin, howie.
10:05 am
>> do you think palin and the book tour and the rollout is being covered as a personality, as a cultural figure or because we all want her to run in 2012 because she has such a great story as a potential presidential candidate. >> i don't know. is she going to run again? >> she quit after two and a half years as governor of alaska, and i think it's sort of an interest that journalists have in ignoring that in saying she's going to run. >> or speculating or legitimizing the attention she gets and she's a public personality now. >> joe walsh, in your earlier comments you conceded that there was some unfair coverage with sarah palin and particularly on personal stuff involving her family, but reporters and this is a woman who is virtually unknown and when reporters went to places like alaska to check her record which matthew takes issue with in his book, isn't that our responsibility when someone is running for a job to use the cliche from the presidency? >> of course, it is.
10:06 am
i differ with matt on a lot of points here. "the new york times" wrote about bristol's pregnancy after she herself confirmed it. i think the barrier from the blogs to the, quote, mainstream media sites is thinner, but she did a lot to put certain things into the national framework and then she's made enemies now from wasilla to washington, d.c. she had basically run a very tiny town before she became governor, so i think most of what the media did really was fair and was our job. i think she did face sexism. i'm on record saying i happen to think that the "newsweek" cover was sexist to depict her legs that way on a national magazine. >> let's put that up. >> here she is, actually, wearing the jogging outfit and she posed for "runner's world." >> i thought it was exploitative. she posed for it and now she's playing the victim which she loves to mri. sorry, matt.
10:07 am
>> feel that was sexism and we can disagree, but what's striking now on the right is, you know, the right has now adopted identity politics and the right has you in adopted the politics of victimhood and you see these people at her rallies who -- you saw them last october we started to see them who feel that their country is being taken away from them. some of them have a kind of populist anger that i think the democrats should be afraid of to try to tap into. >> let me jump in again. you make a lot about the liberal media and the elite media and some of your colleagues on the right during the campaign, whether it's david brooks, kathleen fromme or christopher buckley who hit sarah palin pretty hard who didn't think she could be v.p. >> it is part of the reason we're fascinated by sarah palin. she becomes a lens that reflects the way people see the different world views and ideologies. so that applies even on the right and they recoil from the
10:08 am
same things that the left does from sarah palin. let me play some of her interviews where she's asked about the famous or infamous interviews charlie gibson who asked her about the bush doctrine and katie couric who asked what kind of papers and magazines she read. >> do you think gibson did that to demean you or make you look stupid. >> those are the gotcha techniques that what some people call the mean stream and others now call the lame stream media who want to participate in a tactic like that. >> the reason why you had the responses to katie couric is because you were annoyed with her? >> well, i was annoyed with where we were, what we were doing at the time. she opens the curtain for me to get backstage and there's the perky one again with the microphone and the microphone and the cameras rolling. >> as a representative of the lame stream media, why is she still fuming about this and here she's calling katie couric the perky one as opposed to a journalist. >> the media made a fool of her
10:09 am
and she made a fool of herself on the campaign. >> it was done intentionally because they did not like sarah pail snin. >> think there was a definite subtext. i think people were doing a credible job of trying to cover her and trying to figure out who she was and in the end the combination of her ambition and journalist am bigs created this firestorm. >> do you take her side there? katie couric was biced and most people think she had no question that was out of bounds and sarah palin who at times has hinted that it was not her finest moment that she blew it. >> katie couric is not known for her sympathy with conservatives which is true, but i also write in my book that it was a bad interview and sarah palin admits it was a bad interview and she made mistakes. it's funny that as i talk about my book over the course of the past week. that one interview did so much to shape people's opinions of sarah palin and it may have derailed her future ambitions. >> i hear her book is doing better than yours.
10:10 am
>> joe walsh. you want to weigh in on this? >> let's leave katie aside? speaking of sexism there's a weird vibe between katie couric and the perky one. that's diminishing and she's the pot calling the kettle black, but charlie gibson's interview to me was a tornadoing point and everyone picked up on it later when katie sat her down, but she was stumbling and idiotic in the charlie gibson interview. i'm sorry. the bush doctrine is a gotcha question in the questions of war and peace and our defense policy were and are central to the governing of this united states. >> right. >> so she can't call that gotcha. it wasn't like a pop quiz on, you know, obscure foreign leaders. and the other thing is she really is nursing this grievance against the media and she loves it. >> maybe it's working for her. >> with all of the fact checking there are times when she has contradicted herself. i want to play you back-to-back something about her decision to
10:11 am
run for vice president, first last year on hanity and this week on oprah. >> it was a time of asking the girls to vote on it anyway and they voted unanimously yes. >> this time there wasn't a family vote. >> this was the mommy rules. >> yep. this was i'm going to make the decision. >> so her vote -- it's a lot of revisionist history. the truth is a moving tag wet her sometimes. i don't think it's a very important point i don't think how she decided to run and it underscores why people are uncomfortable with her, the people who are uncomfortable with her. >> she sold 300,000 books the first day. thanks for stopping by. when we come back, journalists push back against the federal panel's recommendation on delaying mammograms, particularly female journalists. we'll talk to one cancer survivor. jerry springer joins us to talk about, who else? oprah. voices heard.
10:12 am
now, the president and congress are moving forward... with reform that includes the best ideas. backed by america's physicians. nurse leaders and nurse practitioners. america's hospitals. prohibiting cuts to medicare benefits. protecting your choice of health care professional. covering preventive care, and closing the prescription gap, to reduce out-of-pocket costs. ♪ this is jim. he returns everything. keep your friends close and your receipts closer. and this is his new chevy, what sold you? i can return it.
10:13 am
of course, now on top of chevy's 5-year/100,000 mile powertrain warranty, they're offering their 60-day satisfaction guarantee. now, when i buy a new chevy i can return it within 60 days if i'm not thrilled. just one problem... what's that? i'm thrilled. change is good jim. the 60-day satisfaction guarantee. from chevy. and you'll get the multicard discount. and the safe driver discount. and you'll save big on the paid-in-full discount. thank you. and the anti-theft discount. and the homeowner's discount. the e-sign discount. and the paperless discount. the multi-freckle discount. i'm just making sure you're listening. and, not to mention, the multi-policy discount. would you like one great big bag or two still pretty big bags? getting the discounts you deserve. now, that's progressive. call or click today.
10:14 am
10:15 am
news organizations routinely report what experts say because, well, they're experts, but when a federal advisory panel said this week there was no need for women in their 0s to get regular mammograms there was something of a media-led revolt led by female journalists. >> women between 40 and 49 they say there's a 1 in 1900 chance that you will be diagnosed with breast cancer. i was one of those. >> you can't get away from the fact that a lot of women believe that they were saved because of a mammogram. >> this is rationing saying, okay, we could do this, we could save some lives. it's just not worth the money. >> joining us now to talk about the coverage of this breast capsy controversy is "time"
10:16 am
magazine's karen tumulty. it took ten seconds before the media started pushing back before the fed ralg advisory panel recommendation. that was surprising? >> not at all. not to me business at least. the message on cancer and particularly breast cancer for decades has been one of hypervigilance. it was just two or three weeks ago this we had a big pink ribbon hanging on the front of the white house. so the idea that suddenly we have a bunch of experts, yes, but looking at only the statistical aspects of medicine coming out with these recommendations was pretty jarring. >> this for you is a very personal issue as you wrote this week. explain why. >> well, because i actually had my first mammogram when i was 19 years old and i think that -- i'm a thyroid cancer survivor and at the time that i had my first breast cancer scare i had no family history at all. since then both mi mother and my aunt developed it.
10:17 am
my mother survived it and my aunt didn't. >> you can't look at it is say what statistics the expert comes up and what percentage that you might develop cancer. you can't look at it that way. >> no, but i think the statistics are extraordinarily valuable and i think that this is a debate that we need to have, but i think ultimately that this -- that in this health care debate, we are looking at a country where the vast majority of people blessedly, do have decent health care coverage and they don't want to feel like, you know, some government panel or scientific statistics are going to come between them and the conversations they should be having. >> when you write about this and when you talk about this you can't separate your real-life experience from the scientific arguments, can you? or should you? >> i didn't. that was one reason i decided to blog about this because certainly, in some ways it's bringing more transparence toe journalism. when people read what i have to
10:18 am
write about these things they can know that i'm a human being who brings a personal experience to this. >> and gail collins did that in "the new york times." she was a breast cancer survivor and i find it valuable. with any recommendations that while there may be a marginal chance for the system as a whole that cancer would be detected from these routine tests. one in 1900, i guess, is the figure, that it looks very different if it's you or your sister or your mother. who wants that take that chance? >> different people have different amounts of risks that they want to tolerate. so i think it's very important that you have the evidence that tells you what the real tradeoffs are, the dangers of too much screening versus what you might miss. i think the thing that threw a lot of women back on this panel's recommendations, though, was the recommendation that women not be taught self-exam. i mean, that is what to me had a little bit of paternalism to it because it felt as though, you know, they were trying to essentially keep information from women so they wouldn't be
10:19 am
sort of wasting the doctor's time. >> if you got a positive you might be anxious about it. most women would rather get that decision themselves. did you get a lot of reaction from the blog? >> i did. i did. michelle o'connell in a situation much like mine wrote that it had been recommended to her that she should have more screening and she took into account other factors in her life and decided no. i think that's the kind of decision that people want to have remain with them and their doctors. >> let's turn to last night's vote in the senate. you covered the health care debate every single day. big headlines about harry reid and the democrats mustering 60 votes to get that health care bill to the floor, but was that much of an accomplishment? >> for weeks it's been pretty clear that in the end he was going get his party together and it's also clear that the hard vote was the one that will come a few weeks down the road to get this bill off the floor. >> right. so the big headlines and the lead stories about what a big deal this was, if the democrats
10:20 am
couldn't even bet the bill to the floor then they're not much of a party, are they? >> that is true, and that is the big question is, you know, they've got all of the levers of government in their hands right now. >> has there been enough journalistic attention to the deals made, for example, dana writing in "the washington post," the louisiana purchase, that mary landrieu got bought off and they an age-ocean tradition of that on capitol hill. >> and the bigger deals are the ones made with various industries. i do think we've been writing too much about process and not enough about these deals because those are things that will affect everyone's health care costs. >> all right. a story that will clearly continue for some time to come. karen tumulty, thank you very much for chatting with us this morning. >> coming up in the second half of "ry liable sources," oprah winfrey shakes up the tv landscape by announcing she'll pull the plug on her show.
10:21 am
we'll examine it with jerry springer. nightline cynthia mcfadden on the former senate aide who had an affair and whether both ran afoul with lobbying laws. >> whether it's hard to keep up with who's up and down in media with who's up and down in media land. s use him.
10:22 am
10:23 am
10:24 am
>> i'm john king and this is "state of the union." here are stories breaking this sunday morning. moderates in his party should not be allowed to dictate the terms of the health care debate. earlier on "state of the union" ohio democrat harold brown says it should include a government-run option for americans who do not have insurance. the investigators are investigating the leak of a radiation leak. the leak happened yesterday
10:25 am
during a refueling outage when the reactors were shut down. the leak posed no threat to the public. 20 workers were affected but were quickly decontaminated. students at university santa cruz are refusing to leave the administrative building where they've been staging a sit-in since thursday. they expect the bless will soon forcibly remuch them. the students are protesting a 2% tuition hike. it is one of several protests in uc campuses across the state this past week. those are your top stories here on "state of the union." she is such a dominant figure on the media landscape that the announcement that she's ending her daytime talk show two years from now made the front page of "the new york times." oprah winfrey is abdicating the throne to concentrate on her cable channel, modestly named the oprah winfrey network. she's become a cultural icon for millions of women and she's been building that brand for 25 years. >> welcome to the very first
10:26 am
national oprah winfrey show! >> i have lost, as of this morning, as of this morning 67 poun pounds. >> the boy is gone. the boy is gone. >> did he ever beat you? >> yes. >> i'm going surprise the winner with $1 million. i feel duped, but more importantly i feel that you betrayed millions of readers. >> a few of my favorite things! >> these years with you, our viewers, have enriched my life beyond all measure. >> so why walk away and make next season the last? here is the real reason. i love this show. this show has been my life, and i love it enough to know when it's time to say good-bye. >> joining us now to examine
10:27 am
oprah's decision and the impact on the television business in las vegas, jerry springer who has hosted a syndicated talk show for nearly two decades and in los angeles, judy muller, former correspondent and professor of broadcast journal im. i'll start with the obvious question. you launched your talk show in 1991, after oprah went national. was she somewhat of an influence on you? >> she's the best there was, she and phil donna hugh and it's hard to puts in the same sentence. she does a real talk show and we do somewhat of a circus. she probably was the first to take the genre of a talk show and to turn it into something personal for the viewer. in other words, people would go on and actually talk about something that was going on in their lives rather than a broad, general issue. >> you say you do pretty much of a circus, but in 1998, for example, you were beating oprah winfrey in many markets across
10:28 am
the country and she continued to soar. so what happened? >> there's no accounting for public taste. i don't know people would watch what we do, but, you know, it's a totally different element of it, but with oprah and it's really been something that's going in our society all together is that the individual -- the viewers have become the entertainment. i men, that is true with the internet. that is true in -- even in journalism now where people with computers are suddenly becoming the journalists. people sitting at home and going on the webs with their own information, i just think the whole landscape is changing, but i think oprah was very influential in making it okay for people to talk about their personal lives. >> judy miller, everyone is trying to put a finger on this connection, this bond that oprah has with millions of women. what do you make of it? well, i think women relate to oprah. obviously, she's very rich, so, you know, as gail collins said
10:29 am
in her column yesterday she's worth a trillion billion dollars. even so she seems like everybody's best girlfriend. she preaches the gospel of self-empowerment and that's because of her personal story raised on a poor farm in mississippi and now one of the 300 richest people in the world according to forbes. this is a rags to riches story that everybody wants to believe in. so i think she really connects with women. >> people forget what a long shot she was considered to be. "time" magazine, in 1986 when she was launching, in she's a black female of ample bulk. she did not fit the usual subscription for a television personity at that time. >> and the ample bulk is part of her appeal. we all relate to weight gain and loss and her struggle with that and speaking of jerry springer she became the anti-jerry springer as he pointed out. while he was looking at sort of the tawdrier side of human
10:30 am
nature, she looked to inspire and elevate and as i said, talked about self-empowerment. she marked out turf that nobody had done before. >> although, jerry, you are the perfect person for me to ask this because i look at your website and some of your shows are stripper showdown, my pimp wants to marry me. >> she did a lot of tabloid stuff and she decided to take a higher road. do you remember that? >> yeah. whether we call it a higher road, it's certainly a different road. what we do is tongue in cheek and it's crazy and as i said i don't think oprah ever really did that. she may have spoken about the same subjects, but she did it seriously. with us, you know, basically our show is a fraternity party. it's aimed at high school and college-age kids and they kind of get it and that's all it is. so again, oprah really created new ground. she opened the doors and says
10:31 am
it's okay to talk about yourself. look, phil donahue had been on for 29 years and he created the genre in a sense, but phil donahue never talked about himself. most of his shows didn't have anything to do with the individual person. it was a larger issue. he would talk about things like health care or a war that was going on. with oprah it was really, i can tell you about my program life. she let people in, and that kind of became an okay thing to say, you know what? if she can talk about her personal life i can talk about mine, and i think that has been happening across the media. >> oprah once said without phil donahue there would not have been an oprah. he started that show out of dayton, ohio. >> she's got a syndicated show until 2011 and then the network she's launching with discovery and the "o magazine" and the whole empire. i don't think she'll disappear, but do you think she'll have a platform as broad as this syndicated daytime show?
10:32 am
>> i wouldn't put anything past her. most of what she touches turns to gold, and i think the fact that we are talking about this and the -- and it is a testament to the impact of oprah winfrey on the industry. this isn't going to happen for two years and yet we're all analyzing the impact and of course, there are a lot of people that will feel the pain. all those abc stations that count on the oprah lead-in to their news cast, they're wondering who will fill in that spot? who will bring in that large audience as a natural lead-in to their newscast? that's real money and that's real advertising dollars. cbs which owns the syndication will see a loss. all of those publishers who love touting their authors on oprah which is a natural best-seller route are all crying. she was tearing up yesterday, but quite frankly, there are a lot of other tearing up as well. >> right. also celebrities coming out of rehab like to go on oprah winfrey and politicians in need of imagery as we saw with sarah
10:33 am
palin kicking off her tour on the oprah winfrey show. we saw a brief clip with her with author james frye and she felt duped by a book. even by endorsing barack obama she give a major boost to the white house, i wonder if we kind of make her too much larger than life as we talk about her. >> well, i think, in fairness, that's probably true simply because we in the business of television or the media tend to be pretty self-absorbed. in other words, we think everything we do, wow, the whole rest of the world is watching and changing their life because of what we say in the television tube. >> that is a stunning admission. let me write that down. we're kind of self-absorbed. go on. >> in other words, no. i don't think the rest of the world -- the rest of america, most people go throughout their daily lives not watching many of us. >> oprah winfrey on a normal day
10:34 am
will get 7 million people watching her. okay. that means about 392 million people aren't. it's going to be fine. people will watch something else and it's not just watching television. they go on the internet. some people still read books. i mean, there are lots of other source of information. politicians will find other shows to go on. i remember when they said johnny carson was leaving, oh, my god, there goes "the tonight show" and the reality is that "the tonight show" continued. television will opinion and there will be other people coming on. i don't think it will be the end of the world, but it will an effect on industry for a while. >> each in television, even people with big numbers who have the personal connection with the audience they spoke about. judy miller, a number of programs including some i've been on, who will be the next oprah? some names have been kicked around. ellen degeneres, dr. phil, katie couric, but i wonder whether
10:35 am
there can be another oprah in this fragmented age of blogs, podcasts and cable channels? >> i think you're absolutely right and jerry springer is absolutely right that we're fractionalizing the media, and i think oprah saw this and is acting on it. she's creating a new cable network o.w.n., oprah winfrey network, and i think she sees the writing on the wall. cable is doing much better than the broadcast shows, the big four because they count on advertising alone. cable gets the subscription fees and the advertising and is more profitable. so she's making that change at a very good time, at a time when we sit down to watch one show and talk about it the next day. >> right. >> those times are over in the way that walter cronkite did. that's over. >> that's past the era. >> she's coming and is acting on it. >> at least we've established and this is not the end of television as we know it, thanks to jerry springer and thanks to
10:36 am
judy miller. >> after the break, is the john enson saga just a beltway sex scandal or a case of potential lawbreaking. >> nbc's cynthia mcfadden on enson should quit the senate for carrying on for his wife?
10:37 am
10:38 am
10:39 am
washington has had a spade of sex scannals this year. the nevada senator has admitted having an affair with his former campaign treasurer cindy hampton. she is married to doug hampton one ofienceon's top senate aides before he left that job. he then became a lobbyist who traded on his ties with the republican lawmakers, but hampton remain very angry with his former intoes in an interview airing on "nightline" he continued the affair after claiming it was over. >> he's still sleeping with your wife, you think? >> yeah, that's hard to hear. yeah. i think he's absolutely at this time pursuing her. >> he's absolutely fixated on
10:40 am
cindy. >> i spoke earlier to cynthia mcfadden from new york. she, of course, the co-host of abc's "nightline" who reported the enson story. >> cynthia mcfadden, welcome. >> it's a pleasure to be with you. >> john enson admitted having this affair with a former aide back in june. i know there are still ethical questions, but why drudge all of this up now? >> the key question we know is we know he admitted the affair and the question was there more than an affair, was there some ethical or legal violations associated with this affair so we decided it was time to dig a little deeper and had the opportunity to do that. >> this is, at heart, a sex scandal story that's good for ratings, right? >> boy, it is at heart a question of whether there was an abuse of power. it is at heart a question of whether or not a sitting united states senator knowingly violated ethics laws, knowingly violated tax laws. that's what it's a question of, i think, howie. now, is there a sex case to go around it?
10:41 am
yes, there is. i don't think that's the selling point. the real question is it's the political story and after you've seen it on monday night you'll agree with me that there's a very intriguing political tale here. >> the story you report side basically a single-source story. doug hampton whom you interview excontinuesive he, he's angry. he's angry john enson slept with his wife. he's angry that john enson fired him and his wife. should you as a journalist be wary of what he says because clearly he is out to get john enson? >> absolutely we should be wary and there are a lot of supporting documents around what doug hampton has to say and the documents have been very important to our reporting of the story. you know, i have to say that doug hampton certainly has an axe to grind here. he was john enson's chief of staff. john enson had an affair with his wife and john enson fired both of them. he has a big axe to grind and as a journalist you have to be super conservative and very careful about following the trail. >> yeah.
10:42 am
hampton acknowledges that. he says he thinks senator enson should resign. there was a letter that came out a few months ago that senator enson wrote to cindy hampton, doug hampton's wife former campaign treasurer for enson's campaign in which he said i have done wrong, i have sinned and i've betrayed what i believed in and yet after he wrote that letter doug hampton is telling you that he believes that the affair actually continued. is that something that he believes or is that something that can be proven? >> he says that, in fact, john enson called his wife and he has the telephone records to prove it, called his wife subsequent to mailing that letter and said disregard the letter. i'm in love with you, and doug hampton says that that very weekend which parenthetically was valentine's weekend, he confronted john enson and said what's going on and enson said to him i'm in love with your wife and i'm not going to apologize for it and we'll see where it goes. >> it's all the more boying napt
10:43 am
because the two families were friends for years in the las vegas area. >> they weren't just friends, howie, they were super friends. this is a friendship of two families for 20 years. you'll see on monday night, lots of photographs to document. the families were close and they called one another brother, enson and hampton. in fact, enson recruited hampton to come work in washington despite the fact that doug hampton had no political experience. >> right. >> because of the common faith, both devout christians and john enson -- hampton says john enson said to him i need a brother in christ to walk with me in the corridors of power,en couraged, by the way, by the c street fellowship. >> this is the house that hampton lived in and tomkoburn lived in. >> we know enson's parents mysteriously, suddenly, abruptly gave the hampton family $96,000. they said it wasn't hush money and it was just a good will
10:44 am
gesture and doug hampton's lawyer asked senator enson for $8 million after doug and sicin had lost their jobs. >> actually $8.5 million. even more. >> did you ask him whether this was some sort of blackmail? >> indeed i did. he said that it wasn't. he said it was simply a question of his lawyer attempting to talk to senator enson's lawyer about severance, about some sort of compensation, some sort of recompense for the fact that both cindy and doug hampton had lost their jobs at this point since both had been employed by enson. the $8.5 million figure was rejected and doug hampton claims that sen tor coburn from oklahoma got involved and attempted to negotiate a $2 million settlement and that was rejected as well, and doug hampton says he wasn't threatening anything, that he was asking for good faith. >> after both of the couples
10:45 am
lost their jobs doug hampton says that senator enson set him up basically as a lobbyist. you asked him about this. let's roll the clip. >> so there is no doubt in your mind that john enson under stood that ethics laws were being broken as well. >> there's no doubt in my mind. >> this is a serious allegation you're making against a sitting united states senator. >> why would a client hire doug hampton if he didn't think he was going have access to john enson's office. it's the only reason why i would hire him. >> there is a federal law that bars former congressional staffers from lobbying anybody in the chamber, let alone the ex-boss for one year. when asking him whether or not john enson broke the law with the lobbying business, isn't hampton a potential lawbreaker. did you press him on that? >> yes, and as you'll see in the broadcast, one of the reasons that doug hampton's credibility starts to go up is because doug hampton implicates himself in having broken ethics laws while
10:46 am
he's trying to implicate john enson. he says, look, clearly i was doing what i just signed a document saying that i wasn't supposed to do which was to lobby the senate for which i had just left. not only the senate, the very senate office they left as a.a. for. so doug hampton in saying that certainly implicates himself, but he says it's important to him that the truth come out. he claims john enson set him up with clients and then told him to call his a.a. and that then, in fact, he was lobbying the senator that he just stepped down as the chief of staff for. clear violation of ethics law, if, in fact, that's what happened. >> i have about half a minute. do you have any concern, how angry, perhaps understandably, that he's using "nightline" to pursue a program griefance. >> journalists are always questioned about being used we can substantiate the facts to the exat the present time that we can. we have certainly contacted
10:47 am
everyone for comment and you will see what people have to say in regards to doug hampton's allegations on monday night. >> cynthia mcfadden, thanks very much for joining us. >> my pleasure. senator enson recently told cnn he's confident an investigation will show he complied strictly with all of the laws and rules and ethics of the senate. you can see that "nightline" interview tomorrow night at 11:35 eastern. up next from george stephanopoulos to diane sawyer and lou dobbs, trying to make sense of the media's revolving door.
10:48 am
10:49 am
10:50 am
10:51 am
as a media reporter you get to grapple with all kinds of thorny issues from bias to plagiarism and plain old sensationalism, but you'd be surprised it involves of who's in, who's out, who's up and down who is coddling whom and who is stiffing whom? >> immigration policy. >> when lou dobbs resigned from cnn he said he doesn't know what he's doing next and hasn't talked to other networks, but he did show up on "the factor" and
10:52 am
apparently he's welcome there. >> i would like you to come back on a semi-regular basis. would you be willing to do that. >> >> it would be my honor. >> cnn was unhappy with his stance against illegal immigration. >> then your ratings leveled as well as all of the ratings for cnn, and they be gone to go down. correct me. i'm wrong. >> no, you're right. >> they didn't like your anti-immigration stuff so much. >> i discern difference then, under the bush administration whom i was criticizing and now with the obama administration and an entirely different tone was taken. >> very interesting, but wait. in the rest of the sentence he exonerated the cnn brass. >> not so much in the case of cnn management, certainly because there's no -- my contract was very explicit. i had absolute editorial control. >> the obama white house, as you know, has been blowing off fox news as part of an attack that viewers first heard on this program. >> certainly the way we view it
10:53 am
is that it really is more a wing of the republican party. >> while the administration has been boycotting hosts such as chris wallace, the president did grant an interview to fox correspondent major garrett who anita dunn told me is fair, along with other network reporters on the asia trip. >> george stephanopoulos who worked for bill clinton has been getting good reviews lately as abc's man in washington and the host of this week. now the network is strongly considering him moving him to "good morning america" where he'll have to deal with this sort of thing. >> also tomorrow we have the day in the life of martha stewart. so martha stewart, shakira, a lot to look forward to. >> stephanopoulos has told management he kind of doesn't want the job unless the morning show is revamped with more hard news and less fluffy stuff. gma news anchor chris cuomo, the son of mario cuomo, very much does want the job of succeeding diane sawyer who is moving to the evening news to replace
10:54 am
charlie gibson, follow the musical chairs. those chairs are almost impossible to follow at "the washington times" which is owned by the reverend sung yung moon and reverend john salomon has resigned after it ousted three top executives and rich wanted to keep his job, but was fired though the paper didn't tell anyone and now miniter has filed a diskrim complaint against the times saying he was coerced into attending a mass wedding presided over by moon. >> the washington times says it will be vindicated in the case. it all gets a little confusing. will lou go to fox and will george jump to gma? will diane trump katie or will brian benefit as the only male anchor? will jay go back to 11:30 and bump conan? it's a tough job, but somebody's got to keep score. still to come, twitter talk. your feedback on whether the media are unfairly skewering sarah palin. 
10:55 am
10:56 am
10:57 am
10:58 am
time now for some twitter talk where you get to sound off. i asked my followers has the coverage of this week's book mrits has been fair or unfair to sarah palin and does she warrant the media attention. here's what some of you had to say. philip sorenson, even a sitting v.p. doesn't get nearly the coverage what. -- i sense her feel covering her
10:59 am
the same way. so are har osh her. the media are indulging themselves while i know ins to nothing of what's going on in the u.s., big health care clinic in iraq, iraq? even if it is unwarranted, thanks a lot. palin's news week cover is unfair since it tries to demean here and i'm a hard core democrat. fairness aside, it has been unfair, the media likes and needs the bump to ratings and circulation like last year. >> john king, as i turn things back over to you this sunday morning. a lot of people out there are not that happy with the tone and sheer value of the sarah palin coverage, but on the other hand, she's a heck of a story. >> think there are open questions about the volume of the coverage and the totality of it and why it's everywhere. she's a fascinating story whether you like her or not. she's as polarizing a political was as clinton was and george w. bush became. she is trying to write the next

John King Reliable Sources
CNN November 22, 2009 10:00am-11:00am EST

News/Business. John King. New.

TOPIC FREQUENCY Sarah Palin 19, Doug Hampton 18, John Enson 16, Washington 10, Katie Couric 8, Jerry Springer 6, New York 5, Cynthia Mcfadden 5, Hampton 5, Charlie Gibson 4, Joe Walsh 4, Palin 4, Howie 4, Phil Donahue 3, Judy Miller 2, Iraq 2, John King 2, Karen Tumulty 2, Lou Dobbs 2, Enson 2
Network CNN
Duration 01:00:00
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 704
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color

disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only
Uploaded by
TV Archive
on 6/20/2011